Non‐enteric infections, antibiotic use, and risk of development of functional gastrointestinal disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal infections are risk factors for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and functional dyspepsia (FD). We investigated whether non-enteric infections and antibiotic exposure are also associated with the development of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). METHODS: In a nested case-control study, random samples of Olmsted County, MN, were mailed valid self-report questionnaires from 1988 through 1994, and then follow-up questionnaires from 1995 through 2003. Survey responders who did not report any FGID symptoms at baseline, but then reported such symptoms in at least one subsequent survey, were classified as new-onset cases. Age-matched controls were individuals who did not have symptoms at either the initial or subsequent surveys. KEY RESULTS: The overall response rate was 78% to the initial survey and 52% to the follow-up survey. Based on the responses, 316 participants had a new onset of an FGID (43 IBS constipation, 95 IBS diarrhea, 25 IBS mixed, and 153 other FGIDs, including FD) and 250 did not (controls). Around 76% (241/316) of cases reported a non-enteric infection vs 66% (166/250) of the controls. The frequency of enteric infections was similar between the two groups. Of the new FGID cases, 83% had a non-enteric infection that was treated with antibiotic. In a logistic regression model, treatment with antibiotics for a non-gastrointestinal infection was associated with the development of an FGID (odds ratio = 1.90; 95% CI: 1.21-2.98; p = 0.005), after adjusting for age and sex. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Based on a case-control study, treatment of a non-gastrointestinal infection with antibiotics appears to be a risk factor for development of an FGID.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".